Comments on No Class For Students Showing No Class

Go to Playing In The Hourglass - Add a comment - Go to No Class For Students Showing No Class

Thanks, RiFDaws.

posted by saul_relative on August 31, 2006 at 8:31 PM | link to this | reply

Well said!

posted by RiFDaws on August 30, 2006 at 4:11 PM | link to this | reply

Yes, but, Mademoiselle, raging hormones, bare cleavage and ass make for

a helluva distraction.  I look at it like this:  personally, I wouldn't mind provocative degrees of undress by most women, but, since I'm a teacher, seeing 16-year-old girls provocatively dressed is annoying and uncomfortable.  It becomes a matter of biology and involuntary instinctive reactions for all concerned.  Schools should educate, not sexually titillate. 

posted by saul_relative on August 29, 2006 at 9:05 PM | link to this | reply

Thanks, swftfox.

posted by saul_relative on August 29, 2006 at 8:54 PM | link to this | reply

I can see banning cellphones ...

but people should be allowed to dress as they please.

I mean, a cyclops would clearly be "distracting" to many students, too ... and yet, no one's suggesting a kid with one eye shouldn't be allowed to enroll.

Too bad there wasn't a guy in our class that everybody called the "Cricket Boy",
because I would have liked to stand up in class and tell everybody,
"You can make fun of the Cricket Boy if you want to, but to me he's just like everybody else."
Then everybody would leave the Cricket Boy alone, and I'd invite him over to spend the night at my house,
but after about five minutes of that loud chirping I'd have to kick him out.
Maybe later we could get up a petition to get the Cricket Family run out of town.

posted by Mademoiselle on August 29, 2006 at 1:37 PM | link to this | reply

Amen! CLICK NUMBER FOUR!

posted by swftfox on August 29, 2006 at 1:23 PM | link to this | reply